Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <m...@tobias.gr> writes: > You could ask Pjotr Prins and David Thompson but I suspect that it was > simply an oversight: most packages link dynamically by default because > it's the sane thing to do, and it would have been reasonable to assume > Ruby did too.
Tobias, I did some investigating about enabling the --enable-shared flag for dynamic linkage of the Ruby package. Superficially it seems that simply --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- #:configure-flags (list "--enable-shared") --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- takes care of the issue. However, this will trigger a rebuild more along the lines of core-updates. --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Building the following 1261 packages would ensure 3512 dependent packages are rebuilt: --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- It is basically everything from SBCL, R, GNOME, XFCE, several Python packages, and more which is expected. So I guess the question is where does this patch go given that it isn't an update but would still spark a massive rebuild? &&& Vicente, I have a suspicion that this patch will need to rest on core-updates (or staging) for a number of weeks before it reaches master. In the meantime, I suggest you just inherit the ruby package in your own channel with the package arguments modified to reflect the `#:configure-flags` snippet I have listed above. Okay. Carry on. -- Brett M. Gilio https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/
